AV-test are taking themselves too seriously, it's normal, it's their test but I don't think anyone else should take this poor excuse of a test (especially performance-wise) seriously. Now vendors with quite debatable reputation concerning endless performance issues and years-standing bugs will decorate their sites with their "outstanding" achievements in this test.

AV-test are taking themselves too seriously, it's normal, it's their test but I don't think anyone else should take this poor excuse of a test (especially performance-wise) seriously. Now vendors with quite debatable reputation concerning endless performance issues and years-standing bugs will decorate their sites with their "outstanding" achievements in this test.

Click to expand...

I hope the ones scoring much higher in AVT than far superior tests like AVC tests get officially exposed for the corrupt cheaters they are. That's the main reason I despise a particular vendor. Lack of ability is one thing, but cheating and bribing is abominable.

The suites from Bitdefender and Kaspersky Lab achieved the maximum points total in all test categories and therefore boast an overall total of 18 points, closely followed by the purchasable version of the Avira software with a total of 17.5 points.

Funny thing, Bitdefender Free Antivirus would have gotten the same points as Internet Security. So I guess Bitdefender Free would have been crowned best home product if they'd included it. There is a reason Bitdefender Free doesn't compete in any major test AV-Test's conclusion that free products are worse than paid is completely false if they don't even test the best free product. Any actual advantages of paid products wouldn't have showed in the tests they conduct anyway, since it's only detection, performance and false positives.

I'm sure that AV-Test doesn't test Bitdefender Free because Bitdefender doesn't want them to. So it's not AV-Test's fault it isn't included. Yet the conclusions they draw are false and misleading. Who would even consider buying the suites if the free version got the same results both at AV-Test and AV-Comparatives?

So kudos to AV-Test 2013 Award silent winner in best homer user protection and best home user performance: Bitdefender Antivirus Free

Funny thing, Bitdefender Free Antivirus would have gotten the same points as Internet Security. So I guess Bitdefender Free would have been crowned best home product if they'd included it. There is a reason Bitdefender Free doesn't compete in any major test AV-Test's conclusion that free products are worse than paid is completely false if they don't even test the best free product. Any actual advantages of paid products wouldn't have showed in the tests they conduct anyway, since it's only detection, performance and false positives.

I'm sure that AV-Test doesn't test Bitdefender Free because Bitdefender doesn't want them to. So it's not AV-Test's fault it isn't included. Yet the conclusions they draw are false and misleading. Who would even consider buying the suites if the free version got the same results both at AV-Test and AV-Comparatives?

So kudos to AV-Test 2013 Award silent winner in best homer user protection and best home user performance: Bitdefender Antivirus Free

Also, G-Data still always getting 6/6 in detection as well as a decent score in performance all the while flopping miserably in other tests is highly suspicious. That's what I meant. Expected of a company that loves to brag about its test results, has a history of cramming their products with third-party technologies and release them early to gain an advantage over others in tests, and is fraudulent enough to recycle recalled stuff, leading to error messages about another computer using this pathetic excuse for a program. Their support forum is actually crawling with user posts stating that they got infected with this or that adware, trojan or exploit.

Believe me, rank amateurs they are, I wouldn't bash them at every opportunity if they were more honest and transparent.